#61
|
|||
|
|||
blinded by light
On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 15:58:42 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 9/30/2019 9:16 PM, John B. wrote: On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 09:30:18 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski wrote: On Monday, September 30, 2019 at 10:11:05 AM UTC-4, duane wrote: Here lights are required at night. There's no specification except one white in front and one red behind. I think the NHTSA codes and most U.S. state codes say the bike lights must be visible from 500 feet. It's true that's a pretty vague spec. Visible under what conditions? Total darkness or surrounded by city glare? And it's high time we had upper limits, as well. - Frank Krygowski Visible from a stated distance is a fairly standard specification. Marine navigation lights have used this standard for more than a hundred years. I think it makes more sense in a marine environment. There's rarely enough bright surrounding light to cause an observer's pupils to stop down. I suspect that the "standard" exists is because it was first set more than a hundred years ago when there was no other method of specifying brightness. I also suspect that as a vessel is required to keep a lookout and the excuse of "Ohhh I didn't see him" would in most cases simply pin the blame onto the party that said it that light brightness is probably not a major factor in vessel to vessel collisions. -- cheers, John B. |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
blinded by light
On Tuesday, October 1, 2019 at 1:07:31 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 10/1/2019 2:54 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/30/2019 8:52 PM, John B. wrote: On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 06:00:24 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 13:26:05 +0700, John B. wrote: The problems with all the modern, marvelous, systems is, "sometimes they don't work". True. However, no system works 100% of the time in 100% of all possible (contrived) situations. A bicycle that is quite suitable for riding on pavement would probably do badly in dirt, mud, rain, etc. One has to design for either a specific situation, or as in this case, the greatest number of reasonable situations, and rely on the intelligence of the operator to know when to disarm the monster. It is impossible to design out clueless operators because we continue to produce better clueless operators. As the driver who appeared sound asleep in his self driven car (recently highlighted here) demonstrates , "rely on the intelligence of the operator" may not be the best path to take. In fact, as I think Frank will testify, industrial safety is largely concerned with eliminating "reliance on the intelligence of the operator" :-) I think it's worse than that. Industrial safety nowadays has to prevent deliberate suicide if it's at all possible to do so. As in "He crawled under the barrier on his belly and stood in front of the robot so it would stab him to death. That's the company's fault." With a mind like that you might consider a second career as plaintiff's attorney. Hmmm. Just won that appeal, sort of. https://law.justia.com/cases/oregon/...9/a165903.html That case was about the alleged failure of a psychiatrist and a social worker to prevent a patient from killing herself -- with a gun, which is an unusual suicide mode for a woman. When people want to kill themselves, they do -- and it doesn't matter how many hotlines you give them to call. In Oregon, however, a suicidal person can be at fault in failing to follow suicide prevention strategies. -- Jay Beattie. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
blinded by light
On Tue, 01 Oct 2019 15:18:18 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: On Tue, 01 Oct 2019 08:14:17 -0500, AMuzi wrote: Which brings us back to Chalo's comment form years ago on RBT that auto steering wheels ought to have a pointy spike in the center. It won't work. Drivers will become accustomed and immunized against the threat of being impaled after a few months of driving without any fatal incidents. You can't convince someone by merely repeating a threat over and over on a daily basis with nothing happening. It's much like Chicken Little warning everyone constantly that the sky is falling until everyone is so tired of hearing the warning that they ignore it when the problem becomes real. Same with the spike. The driver that impales himself on the steering wheel will probably act surprised and announce "Gee, it's never done that before". If you want a lasting effect, you have to hit the driver with a single spectacular blow that will leave a lasting impression of fear, and not a continuous irritation. Driver training tries to do that by showing movies of mangled accident victims. The military does the same by showing movies of battlefield carnage. I did the same thing to several pre-teens caught smoking by giving them a tour of the local hospital oncology ward and having the lung cancer and emphysema victims terrorize the kids from their hospital beds. The production manager at a former employer made it clear that the machines were dangerous by inserting a sausage into the crimper and waving around the results. (Unfortunately, he ruined the effect by munching on the remains of the sausage). Maybe if prospective bicycle buyers were required to negotiate and survive 30 minutes of downtown traffic, complete with simulated injuries and fatalities, before a store is allowed to sell them a bicycle, we might see a better class of cyclists. Same for car drivers. Or simply stop referring to highway crashes as "accidents". Determine who is at fault and punish them. I hate to keep referring to Thailand but here if a car hits a bicycle the car is deemed, subject to evidence to the contrary, to be in the wrong and is then responsible for all costs involved ranging from replacement of the bicycle to the funeral costs and a suitable compensation paid to the cyclist's family. In addition if a motor vehicle hits a bicycle and the cyclist is killed the charge can be "causing death by dangerous driving" which can result in a 10 year prison sentence Perhaps being penalized, either financially or by incarceration, for running over bicycles would make a difference. It might be noted that when severe penalties are to be inflected as a penalty extensive investigation is usually required to determine who is fundamentally at fault, which cold penalize wrong doing bicyclists. -- cheers, John B. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
blinded by light
On 10/1/2019 4:07 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 10/1/2019 2:54 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/30/2019 8:52 PM, John B. wrote: On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 06:00:24 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 13:26:05 +0700, John B. wrote: The problems with all the modern, marvelous, systems is, "sometimes they don't work". True.Â* However, no system works 100% of the time in 100% of all possible (contrived) situations.Â* A bicycle that is quite suitable for riding on pavement would probably do badly in dirt, mud, rain, etc. One has to design for either a specific situation, or as in this case, the greatest number of reasonable situations, and rely on the intelligence of the operator to know when to disarm the monster.Â* It is impossible to design out clueless operators because we continue to produce better clueless operators. As the driver who appeared sound asleep in his self driven car (recently highlighted here) demonstrates , "rely on the intelligence of the operator" may not be the best path to take. In fact, as I think Frank will testify, industrial safety is largely concerned with eliminating "reliance on the intelligence of the operator" :-) I think it's worse than that. Industrial safety nowadays has to prevent deliberate suicide if it's at all possible to do so. As in "He crawled under the barrier on his belly and stood in front of the robot so it would stab him to death. That's the company's fault." With a mind like that you might consider a second career as plaintiff's attorney. Not me. I was more interested (although grudgingly) in how to design the barriers to make that impossible. BTW, the incident that inspired that post wasn't actually a suicide, AFAIK. Instead it was a super-cocky young engineer who thought he knew better than all the system designers. And he didn't crawl under the barrier. Instead he lay down on his back on a parts conveyor to get carried into the workcell without shutting it down. Still, when he cleared the sensor problem that had stopped the robot, it did go right through him. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
blinded by light
On 30/09/2019 14.54, jbeattie wrote:
snip I also see a lot of DRL "good luck" rear blinkies -- the sort of thing you would get free for your kid to wear trick-or-treating. Why bother. I've been using relights for 6 months now in a fit and forget mode. I've only had rear lights fail a few times due to water ingress, or cable issues, so I see the reelight not as an alternative to proper lights, but an always on(for a given value of) flash and hope until you notice the main rear light is defunct for some reason. Super-bright front flashers should be outlawed, but then only outlaws will have bright flashers. Can't you just shoot people in America if you consider threatened? |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
blinded by light
On 30/09/2019 16.46, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/30/2019 9:11 AM, Duane wrote: On 30/09/2019 9:54 a.m., jbeattie wrote: On Monday, September 30, 2019 at 6:18:46 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote: On 9/29/2019 11:03 PM, David Scheidt wrote: Jeff Liebermann wrote: :On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 03:06:49 +0000 (UTC), David Scheidt wrote: :I got blinded by a bike light this afternoon. :Blinded during afternoon daylight hours? I could see that happening :at night, but not during daylight hours. Have you recovered from the :blinding light? During the day, gray and rainy. :Some stupidly bright flashing thing, poorly aimed. :Probably someone doing weapons research. Megalumen lights will robably be prominent in the next inevitable war. :How do I know it was poorly aimed? I was inside. At my desk. On the :second floor. Looking 90 degrees away from the direction the bike was :traveling. :If it was a headlight, 90 degree side illumination suggests it may :have had 180 degree beamwidth. Impressive for a bicycle light. My desk is at the corner of the building. I stand facing out a east window, and have southern ones immediately to my right. The biker was in the alley on the block south, heading towards me. The light was annoying me (flahs, flash, flash, SUPER FLASH, flash...), and turned to see what it was, which is when I really was blinded. If I'd been driving a car down the alley, I'd have run the guy and his pinarello over. :Assuming your description is accurate, my guess(tm) would be a poorly :secured headlight that had rotated itself to one side. Further, I :suspect that the rider was not familiar with the operation of a day :time blinky "safety" headlight. Perhaps the bicycle was stolen, he :was making a hasty escape, and he did not have time to adjust and :secure the headlight? :http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/bicycles/slides/bicycle-flashlight.html :It's difficult to be certain, but I suspect that this was a unique and :unusual occurrence, which is unlikely to be repeated in the near :future. Dude lives on that block (or at least, he keeps his collection of bikes there). I expect I'll see him and the light again. A brief survey of bikes in for service shows some large number of tail lights pointing at the pavement and a lesser but significant number of head lamps directed at outer space. Tail lights don't have much directionality except for the designs with the built in bike paths. https://ride.lezyne.com/collections/...1-led-23r-v104 The popular move these days is multiple tail lights -- which is O.K. unless you're riding behind the person. I have a single pulsing rear light which is a nice compromise. You stand out as a bicycle without blinding anyone. My bike also has a bunch of reflective tape, and if I'm really concerned, I'll wear my reflective shoe covers. Those things are really noticeable -- but just so-so keeping my feet dry. I also see a lot of DRL "good luck" rear blinkies -- the sort of thing you would get free for your kid to wear trick-or-treating. Why bother. Maybe it's just to comply with the law. Here lights are required at night. There's no specification except one white in front and one red behind. They've recently added that blinkies are allowed. BTW, there's no real specification as to what constitutes night either. I have decent lights for night riding though I don't do that much. I have some pretty decent ones that I keep on the bike in case of a rainy commute or when I commute this time of year. I use some reflective tape because unlike lights, reflectors are mandatory at all times. Since I don't have pedals I can put tape on my shoes. For wheels it's even better. You can use tape on the wheel but it has to cover the full circumference of the wheel. My HED wheels have reflective labels but they aren't compliant because there are spaces on the rim with no label. But we are allowed to substitute reflective tape on the seat stays or fork. Now how does that make sense? The cops at our club's info session told us it would be useful if the clowns making the laws actually saw a bicycle but no matter, we have to comply to avoid the fines. The fines are 65 bucks per missing reflector so I put the tape on. I don't see much use for reflectors in daylight anyway. Super-bright front flashers should be outlawed, but then only outlaws will have bright flashers. BTW, there's no real specification as to what constitutes night either. I could not find it for Quebec but in USA the legal concept is well defined ['civil twilight'] as it affects various activities and obligations from firearm use to auto lights to watercraft. Critically it effects aviation and maritime operations. You have astronomical, civil and nautical. Good article here; https://www.timeanddate.com/astronom...-twilight.html |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
blinded by light
On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 09:34:19 +0100, Tosspot
wrote: On 30/09/2019 14.54, jbeattie wrote: snip I also see a lot of DRL "good luck" rear blinkies -- the sort of thing you would get free for your kid to wear trick-or-treating. Why bother. I've been using relights for 6 months now in a fit and forget mode. I've only had rear lights fail a few times due to water ingress, or cable issues, so I see the reelight not as an alternative to proper lights, but an always on(for a given value of) flash and hope until you notice the main rear light is defunct for some reason. How noticeable are the relights, say from 50 meters away? I've been using a flashing red tail light for some time that is quite noticeable but of course you need to charge the battery once in a while :-( Super-bright front flashers should be outlawed, but then only outlaws will have bright flashers. Can't you just shoot people in America if you consider threatened? -- cheers, John B. |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
blinded by light
On 02/10/2019 09.40, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 09:34:19 +0100, Tosspot wrote: On 30/09/2019 14.54, jbeattie wrote: snip I also see a lot of DRL "good luck" rear blinkies -- the sort of thing you would get free for your kid to wear trick-or-treating. Why bother. I've been using relights for 6 months now in a fit and forget mode. I've only had rear lights fail a few times due to water ingress, or cable issues, so I see the reelight not as an alternative to proper lights, but an always on(for a given value of) flash and hope until you notice the main rear light is defunct for some reason. How noticeable are the relights, say from 50 meters away? I've been using a flashing red tail light for some time that is quite noticeable but of course you need to charge the battery once in a while :-( The ones I've seen, very. They also have quite a field of vision. The startup is interesting, they flash about 1 Hz for a minute of two, then get up to 2 Hz, then seem to settle on about 3 after 5 minutes. Can't really say much more, if it's still working in a couple of years it will be worth it. If not, a Pox on the lot of 'em! |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
blinded by light
On Tuesday, October 1, 2019 at 6:45:34 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/1/2019 4:07 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 10/1/2019 2:54 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/30/2019 8:52 PM, John B. wrote: On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 06:00:24 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 13:26:05 +0700, John B. wrote: The problems with all the modern, marvelous, systems is, "sometimes they don't work". True.Â* However, no system works 100% of the time in 100% of all possible (contrived) situations.Â* A bicycle that is quite suitable for riding on pavement would probably do badly in dirt, mud, rain, etc. One has to design for either a specific situation, or as in this case, the greatest number of reasonable situations, and rely on the intelligence of the operator to know when to disarm the monster.Â* It is impossible to design out clueless operators because we continue to produce better clueless operators. As the driver who appeared sound asleep in his self driven car (recently highlighted here) demonstrates , "rely on the intelligence of the operator" may not be the best path to take. In fact, as I think Frank will testify, industrial safety is largely concerned with eliminating "reliance on the intelligence of the operator" :-) I think it's worse than that. Industrial safety nowadays has to prevent deliberate suicide if it's at all possible to do so. As in "He crawled under the barrier on his belly and stood in front of the robot so it would stab him to death. That's the company's fault." With a mind like that you might consider a second career as plaintiff's attorney. Not me. I was more interested (although grudgingly) in how to design the barriers to make that impossible. BTW, the incident that inspired that post wasn't actually a suicide, AFAIK. Instead it was a super-cocky young engineer who thought he knew better than all the system designers. And he didn't crawl under the barrier. Instead he lay down on his back on a parts conveyor to get carried into the workcell without shutting it down. Still, when he cleared the sensor problem that had stopped the robot, it did go right through him. -- - Frank Krygowski Recently in China and entire large bridge collapsed into the river below it and killed people living in boats beneath. What would you care to bet that it wasn't built by the same company that won the Oakland span of the bay bridge from an American contractor? Every single piece of steel in the present bridge has been shown to be FAR below standards. Every support connection has broken before the bridge even opened and an American firm has redesigned it to have sliders on it so that supposedly the bridge would be able to slide back and forth supported by the suspension wires which have since been found not to have been properly sealed and which are now rusting. This must be why you think that the Democrats who run California are so intelligent. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
blinded by light
On 10/2/2019 4:40 AM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 09:34:19 +0100, Tosspot wrote: I've been using relights for 6 months now in a fit and forget mode. I've only had rear lights fail a few times due to water ingress, or cable issues, so I see the reelight not as an alternative to proper lights, but an always on(for a given value of) flash and hope until you notice the main rear light is defunct for some reason. How noticeable are the relights, say from 50 meters away? I've been using a flashing red tail light for some time that is quite noticeable but of course you need to charge the battery once in a while :-( We were in Amsterdam about a year ago and came across a fair number of Reelights. The ones I saw were very unimpressive. I'd describe their output as a twinkle rather than a flash. In total darkness, I suppose they would be noticeable, but among the city lights and car lights, they were far from attention getting. In daylight I can't imagine they made any difference - which is one reason I'm very skeptical of the Reelight-funded "study" that found DRLs to be so magically wonderful. Now, LED efficiency has been increasing, and I suppose the LEDs fitted to Reelights have improved. There's no way of knowing what generation of Reelights I observed. But I don't see any particular advantage of a Reelight over (say) a more standard dynamo setup. BTW, speaking of LED improvements: It's too bad that manufacturers of LED headlights haven't settled on a standard configuration of replaceable LEDs, similar to the standard configuration of halogen bulbs. If they had, one could increase the lumen output of a good LED headlamp without destroying its optical design. I know the manufacturers have no financial incentive for doing that. But from a user's perspective, it would have been nice. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Blinded | James[_8_] | Techniques | 59 | September 12th 15 11:29 PM |
Blinded by the light. | James[_8_] | Techniques | 1 | November 26th 13 05:27 AM |
Cyclist blinded by egg. | Simon Mason | UK | 52 | October 26th 05 04:09 PM |
Ever blinded by your helmet? | B Paton | Social Issues | 27 | November 16th 04 11:03 PM |
Blinded by the light | elyob | UK | 301 | October 4th 03 05:34 PM |